Acceptance, Tolerance and Universalism

Truth is not absolute, it is relative. What is good and what is bad is also relative. I had spend large parts of my day reading wikipedia while in college and my friends asked me why I did it. I have been poring over newspapers for years and many have asked me 'what is the point'. I have engaged in discussions on many topics ranging from energy conservation to random topics like "Has mankind become less intelligent with the passing of time" and foreign affairs, it may or not have lead to a final conclusion or anyone changing their stance, but I have always emerged the wiser and this too was pointless according to many.

I am not going to elaborate on why I did those things, but I would like to consider the difference in views here. I felt this was good for me, this is what made me happy and I did what I wanted to do. Many have made the decision to enjoy the present and let the future worry about itself using the statement that 'if I die tomorrow, I want it to happen only after I have enjoyed myself fully'. Many pursue and focus on short term gains and happiness without even looking at long term impact of their actions. It is true that many do not even have a long term view.

There are traditional ways to have fun and relax, then there are the popular ways of doing it and then there are the emerging ways to do the same. Although this could be the stated or ostensible purpose, the real aim could be to escape, put up a brave front or could be an imitation or playing to a crowd for acceptance and praise. Those who do not fall under the accepted and popular norms are considered sad and stupid.

I do not wish to get get into the rights and wrongs, good and bad aspects of it. But to each of us, what we are doing is right and will rarely consider the alternative whatever the circumstances. We are all safe under the illusion that our beliefs, what we think is good and bad, what we have and we are doing, are all right. Any threat or challenge to it is unacceptable. "They are wrong, I am right" is what leads to "My faith is right, theirs is wrong" and communal violence. This is what lead to "My culture is superior, they are savages" and wiping out of entire cultures and civilisations in Latin America, North America, Australia and in India during colonial rule. In India it is still happening as tribal cultures are threatened by government enforced eviction and cultural destitution in the name of development. The belief leads to "My land is superior, this is mine and you are not welcome" attitude exploited in Mumbai by self-serving politicians.

These are arrogant, bigoted, selfish, divisive views. I have held many views similar to this, when first exposed to multiple cultures during the first days of college,  when the pride of having made it to a top college in the country had gone to my head etc. The reasons for holding these views could range from misplaced pride to defensiveness or vulnerability, but one this for certain- such views will only narrow us down. As long as your belief does not affect me, I have no issues with what you believe in- irrespective of whether it opposes, ridicules, agrees or is indifferent to mine. They are all right and they can all co-exist and the difference in beliefs is partly a matter of choice, partly forced by circumstances and partly an involuntary response by who we are in reality.

It is about accepting other beliefs and ideologies, living with them in harmony and accepting it is all true while we have our own beliefs and ideologies which are modified, sharpened and made better in light of what we have learned from other beliefs and ideologies. It is high time we all, including me, learned this for a better world.

Surely you are joking Mr.Tharoor

I had respect for this guy. His books are brilliant, funny and enjoyable, his insights into foreign policy are awesome and his academic credentials are something to envy (PhD at 22??OMG!). But his antics on twitter these days have been nothing short of trying to gain a fan following, perhaps even shades of a "cult of personality" with twitterati clamouring for retweets. Many of the requests for RTs are genuine (blood donation, support for causes and some about his work in Tvm and I also realised that Al Jazeera website was banned in India or is it that only I cannot access it??), but some are just sycophantic paeans.

This latest article was the nail in the coffin. How can anyone interpret Congress victory in Karnataka as a resurgence? Was there an increase in vote share? Yes, a phenomenal 2%! All the perfumes of arabia won't wash of the soot from the Coal scam let alone 2G, Commonwealth, Adarsh, Riots in Assam and recently, genuflecting before China, editing the CBI report and the railway appointments scandal. I am no fan of the BJP in Karnataka, they ruined the environment, resulted in revenue loss to the state, exported raw material cheap to China (when we should be using the high quality ore for our own needs and not be a colony for supplying raw materials and dumping manufactured products) and then the attacks in coastal Karnataka by fundamentalist elements. Infighting in the party was just a byproduct of these accomplishments and no one would argue against outing the BJP in Karnataka.

The BJP's vote share fell 10% and these votes went to KJP and JD(S). The BJP lost votes, the Congress didn't gain much and it does not take a psephologist to understand that it was merely an anti-BJP vote. This is not a resurgence, if anything, it is a sign of things to come. Surely Mr.Tharoor knows this and then why is he coming up with inanities? In your books I have read about how those who speak out about the big powers are suppressed while some are co-opted. Initially with the cattle class comment and the resignation over IPL nonsense, I was disappointed that your fate would be the former, but now it seems you have unfortunately permitted the latter.

If there is anything about the choice of the persona for my bashing and why I haven't said anything about corruption in BJP or among the Left in Kerala or about Mamata Banerji's suppression of dissent, it is because we do not expect anything better from them. Enough has been written about it and finally, perhaps most importantly, it is my choice and I have the right to freedom of speech. If the question is "why don't you do something about it rather than being an armchair activist", I am trying to and been working hard for that.

For almost a decade I admired Lance Armstrong, his story was amazing, inspirational and it gave me the courage to keep going no matter whatever my disappointment and I wished I had some of the same grit and courage. Last year when he confessed of being a dope-cheat, I was robbed of a role model. It hurt in some sense and a similar feeling (not so much in magnitude) engulfs me now.

Coming from a person of such impeccable credentials, it is shocking and what I am worried about is the undue influence credible voices may have on public opinion. His columns are not going to be widely read by the crores of Indians going to polls, but it will influence the ideas framed abroad of what is actually happening in India.

PS- The pic shows an example of some of the retweets- a genuine cause and another one blindly publicising a news without any real analysis. The personal opinion on Kieran Pollard's innings against Hyderabad in the IPL is something I agree with- 66 of 27 balls? 8 sixes and 2 boundaries? INHUMAN is what I call the punishment on SRH bowlers. About the biggest grid- firstly, what use is a national grid if there is not adequate power to transmit? Power stations are lying idle because of lack of fuel- gas and coal because those allotted coal blocks in the illegal way decided to hold on to these assets rather than mine coal since prices were booming or they had no idea how to get the coal out of the earth since they were not in the mining business in the first place! I am merely pointing at the flawed policy and not talking about any presumptive losses. Being the biggest grid is again insignificant, USA chose for three separate grids in three zones. Russia does not need to set up grids to Siberia and China does not need to do that in the western non-industrialised part and for Canada it would be stupid and impossible to send electricity to hundreds of islands, inhabited and uninhabited. The engineering, building and laying work must be appreciated but the policy making (which is what the government does) requires no big pat on the back, if anything, this was only too late in coming. Maybe not, since the south was saved from the black-out last year since it was not integrated with the national grid :P

Ramblings and Government Bashing

Firstly on CBI- the superintendance on corruption cases lie with CVC. CBI was started as Delhi Special Police during world war 2 to prevent corruption in government procurement at that time since officials had a lot of discretion and were using it to make a lot of money for themselves. It was established under the Viceroy's control to protect the queen's money, since it was the British government in India at that time, and this money was being protected from Indians misusing it.It was truly an independent authority at that time since it was attached to an entity that wanted to prevent swindling of money and not under an authority which was embezzling money. All the real powers of the Viceroy went to the Prime Minister in some, the Viceregal Palace but became the Presidential residence and he also became head of the state. So, keeping the CBI under Prime Minister who actually heads the government against which there are charges of corruption simply because of a historical oversight while transferring power is unreasonable.

Article 75 of the Constitution of India says, inter alia, that the council of ministers shall be collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha. This collective responsibility is the bedrock of Parliamentary democracy and it means that whatever the internal differences between the council of ministers, they should act as one and in one voice under the leadership of the Prime Minister. The Council of Ministers are appointed by the President on the advice of the Prime Minister and it says nothing about coalition compulsions or the need to satisfy the party leader of a coalition member and so the acts of the coalition party's minister is also an action of the Cabinet which it cannot dismiss or distance itself from in Parliament. Swiftly correcting any mistake by removing the minister and reversing the decisions is essential if the minister has gone against the Council Of Minister's judgement or has acted unilaterally. This is to enforce decisions within the cabinet and is the principle of individual responsibility. This also enforces discipline and collective decision making. These are basic principles of parliamentary democracy and the current government has observed these principles only in breach- hiding behind coalision dharma, a very childish mastermind of mischief excuse of "he did it, I didn't know anything about" used by the squeeky clean goody goody boy in class and bursts of activity to prove it has life while manipulating parliamentary politics by forcing abstentions are all an insult to democracy

Sometime in early 2011(during the debate on 2G I think), Manmohan Singh had made a statement that the people had given them a mandate and so they can continue with the government. In India, the parliament is not supreme, the government is not supreme but it is the constitution that is Supreme. Parliament cannot make amendments that alter basic structure of the constitution and laws that take away fundamental rights or goes against the constitution. Parliament that has the mandate of the people there are not supreme and the government has to be responsible to the Lok Sabha. Institutions like the CAG and Supreme court are meant to uphold the constitution and act as checks against transgressions by the executive. So clamouring about people's mandate is a sad excuse- it was a people's government that imposed emergency and made a mockery of the same mandate.



The trigger for this post is this http://www.indianexpress.com/news/phantom-democracy/1113222/0 and some ideas that have been lying around in my mind.

I Miss Science

Science is based on laws and these laws are universal. It works everywhere, anywhere, everytime and anytime. But for civil services, I am only concerned about humanities subjects right now and there are hardly any rules and it is almost impossible to predict how things will turn out to be. Consider policy making and marketing - one can gather all the data, analyse it and build models and make predictions but it will all depend on how people react. No two people are the same and they will react in widely different ways and that is because no two persons grew up in the same way, had the same experiences which influenced their thinking and hence they don't think alike. Finally, even if we can group individuals according to similarities- age groups, income, gender, profession, education, region, religion- expecting them to act in their own interest or according to obvious common sense and logic (a) too will only make us realise that we can only approximate and make estimates. Sometimes we act in short term interest, sometimes we act considering the long term future- even we do not know how we will react until the situation comes.

How do people react to a stock market crash? It is silly to sell right now because the prices are falling, but if people have the common sense to wait it out and hold on to these stocks which will eventually have to return to their normal prices, they will not lose everything. But then there are the really smart individuals who try to short sell stocks or buy up when prices are dirt cheap. Make hay while the sun shines or just follow the croud and take a jump from the cliff? If we say that the smart ones will make hay, then I guess Lehmann Brothers were not that intelligent at all. We know that we shouldn't be polluting our environment and burning more fossil fuels, we know that wars are a waste and yet the defence industry is world's biggest employer. We are still not sure whether it is more important to feed millions of our hungry brothers and sisters or to splurge on fighter planes, we are not remotely guilty on spending on pleasures and complain about our own misfortunes and not value the things we have in life ,while millions suffer from worse fates.

It is not just human beings, but results of our actions, weather phenomenon and geography too that defies our comprehension and prediction. A tsunami may or may not happen and an earthquake can happen anytime. We cannot predict how exactly climate change will affect us (we do not even agree on climate change), we are not sure how the monsoon will be and how GM crops will affect us and how to handle antibiotic resistant bacteria. We cannot comprehend or measure how one action will have a lot of complex domino effect on sometimes unrelated issues, we cannot quantify everything all the time- the benefits of literacy can hardly be measured, nor can we say with certainty the benefits of job guarantee schemes- they go far beyond the income generated as they prevent distress migration that leaves people vulnerable to exploitation by mediators and employers, it does not break their children's education, immunisation and health and protects them from child labour and the elderly are not left behind to fend for themselves in their homes and many more positive outcomes that we cannot predict and generalise.

Thus, there are thus two issues with all humanity subjects- our inability to comprehend and understand our own nature and exact workings of the physical world we live in. The most confounding is when unpredictability of nature meets our own strange nature. Rain, drought and floods- we do not know what may happen and how it will specifically affect and we do not know how we will react to them. Sometimes we might have the science in place, but our nature and unpredictability means that we cannot do the right thing- we are not implementing renewable energy to the extent we need, we do not deal with issues like malnutrition and child deaths properly. We can only approximate, make rules as we go along and constantly adapt without sticking only to scientific facts since there is a lot that is not amenable to laws and facts.

The scientific answer to these problems are very simple, that is how we frame policy too. But then, in implementation we fail. There are too many dynamics at work- selfishness, greed, lazyness, ignorance, short-termism, religious beliefs and superstitions and complacency. Most of the development schemes in India fail due to corruption or poor design based on poor input into the decision making, as individuals making these decisions have the wrong priorities or incomplete ideas about the real problems- both point to our inability to understand ourselves and how things work in this world. There are no scientific explanations to these, each individual and situation is unique in the real world and perhaps that is why the civil service examinations are more about humanities subjects and there is a real bias against science and engineering subjects. There is no direct relationship between input and output- one cannot measure the success of a literacy campaign comparing the cost and income generated to government or even using the number of people benefited- the benefits could multiply since they will decide to teach their children and parents and siblings, read newspapers to become aware and responsible citizens, learn more about healthy practices or unfortunately some of the could drop out due to financial or health pressures.

In order to improve sanitation facilities, simply constructing a toilet will not do. The scientific solution will include adequate water, lighting and waste disposal facilities. Thrown in economics and you get low cost of building and maintaining it, ergonomics gives us adequate lighting leading to the toilet for common toilets and common sense will make us design it to be theft-free. But then no one could have seen this coming b nor would science explain the reasons for vandalism. As I said before, I have realised that science has a limit, it does not have answers to all our problems but it can point us to a solution, but getting there is a challenge in itself. Using the comparison from the movie Lincoln, Science can show us true north to reach our solution, but humanities is required to tackle all the swamps and forests and rivers that come in our path.

The job of a civil servant is to give the right input and to implement policies and this requires a clear and as complete as possible understanding of ground realities and then implementing them in spite of the obstacles and constantly changing and beyond apprehension circumstances. A scientific approach can only say one has to adapt to survive, it is by learning subjects that do not have specific laws and constants that a civil servant can realise that only thing one can do is give it our best, use our hardwork, patience, intelligence and all the skills we can muster and face the situation. The emphasis on humanities subjects for the exam is perhaps the apt training and selection method.

As for me, I learnt Chemistry and Electronics and I miss those days. It was simple and solvable, an equation will give us all the information we need, a circuit or a code can simply do the job and at the right conditions and catalyst, we can prepare the compound we need. A bit of lateral thinking and deep subject knowledge is enough and I miss those days.

Media, Wars and Friends

For a little over a week, the hot news in Kerala was the allegations of domestic violence against a Minister by his wife and what unfolded involved more drama than the usual menu of soaps and reached the standards of jam-packed action in some of the male protagonists movies. Newspapers had nothing else to report, there were live panel discussions and the defence minister remarked that it shouldn't turn into a state celebration. Once the minister resigned, panel discussions were about the drop in the price of gold and its various nuances. Now that gold prices are hovering at the same level, it has turned to Chinese "infiltrations" on the border. While the first two issues were restricted to Kerala the last one was a celebration of national scale and by the time the Chinese had camped in Daulat Beg Oldi, my mother had already fallen prey to panel discussionomania so much so that she asked me whether an India-China war was possible.

Then I see a sensible view take on the issue (a) and there is also the obvious fact that it is nothing more than  a boundary issue and differences of perspective- I say the boundary is there, but he is saying it is here and there is nothing more to it than that. Television panel debates have only served to vitiate the atmosphere and it was most evident during the issue over beheading of soldiers at the India-Pakistan border. Fuelled by the fact that anyone who spits out anti-Pakistan vituperations would receive ample airtime and be able to appeal to or increase nationalistic feelings to boost their popularity and appear (merely appear) strong against old adversaries. But one forgets that it is easier to shout while in the opposition (or while supporting the government from outside) but an entirely different job to get work done while occupying power. Mamata Banerji and V.S.Achuthanandan are the ones who have found such transitions difficult in India recently.

On to the Pakistan issue, I have read that delaying visas and suspending dialogue is of absolutely no help and we must increase people to people contact to solve the animosity. These are really good theoretical points that appeal to the peace brigade and idealists, but one forgets that even if India were to make any and all concessions to Pakistan, it would not help even in the slightest because it is not the civilian government that calls the shots in Pakistan but the army and it needs the bogey of India to cement its position, irrespective of the changes in the "Green Book" (b) in Pakistan. So, the theory that once the issues are resolved, the army in Pakistan will fade into insignificance is just wishful thinking. Let us make no mistake about the fact that the existence and power the army enjoys in Pakistan and the free reign it has and its ability to use "non-state" actors in Indian Kashmir or Afghanistan owes far less to the civilian government's strategy and the official India-Pakistan stand on Kashmir, but more to the civilian leadership's helplessness.

People to people contact and border trade can promote good relations between the people, promote economic welfare and a better life for the people in the border towns and so it is an end in itself, it cannot lead to anything more, just like cricket can only bring in advertising revenue and a few days of passion and tension without really building up confidence in any measure. What this also means is that they should be isolated from the talks and relations with Pakistan since they have little positive or negative impact and must be seen as separate issues. Let the dialogue process with a civilian government continue too, except under extreme circumstances, since it is quite obvious that they have little say in what the army, intelligence agencies or its proxies do. If there is some untoward incident, do not go roll back the gains, but simply freeze them for the time being and resume from where it was left off. The decision not to send our cricket team to Pakistan is fine since the security situation is not favourable there, but preventing Pakistani players from coming to India is as silly as not permitting Srilankan players from playing in Tamilnadu.

Apart from media antics, there is little to suggest anything seriously alarming along the border with China. It has other bigger worries and battles to fight and a cost to benefit analysis says that there are only costs but no benefits at all by raising a conflict with India. China's disputes against Japan and all the South-East Asian nations is part of its race for resources with cleverly, although not too subtly and effectively, masked historical claims (c) . These are more important, worthwhile and urgent for China to win and the world to resolve and has the potential to draw in the rest of the world as America is intent on acting as the protector of Asia against a rising China. Any conflict has drastic implications for China as it is dependent on exports, and shipping lanes across the South China sea is its lifeline which cannot be kept open by waging a war, but only by a threatening posture.

The cost of conflict with India is minimal for China, but the benefits are almost nothing. Of course, China has attacked India in the past and the signs were missed by the establishment due to its soft corner for a fellow developing nation with problems similar to the one that was confronting India at the time. Our army was ill-equipped and not acclimatised for the war and this holds lessons for us. Let our army be prepared for the eventualities as it should always be, while the civilian leadership tries to settle out the issue by dialogue and removing misunderstandings. China's intention could be not so straight-forward as territorial gains, but to blow the whistle on current world alliances- bring out secret alliances into the open and reveal who stands where and with who and then comfortably go back to its side of the boundary to prevent the conflict from growing out of control. As China advances into India, it can realise who is with itself and who is on the other side- perhaps the US will help India and Russia will side with China (a slight reversal from 1962) and once this is out in the open, China will be able to dominate proceedings freely with energy and resources from Russia to satisfy its growing needs and less dependency on South China sea.

We do not need military alliances, but strong relations with the South-East Asian nations including Myanmar will mean that we have more leverage in the area than China. ASEAN, Myanmar and APEC have sought India's partnership actively and persistently not as just a market or economic partner but to counter an assertive China that is dictating terms, to whom these nations want to say that we have other partners who respect us. This in itself will be a strong deterrent against China and India does not have to grudgingly accept US foothold in the region due to the Chinese threat. Close ties with Russia is also imperative since a China-Russia alliance is a strong possibility as has been recently witnessed with Russia giving China weapons more advanced than the one it delivered to India (d).

India's strategic co-operation with the US involving economic, scientific, technological and educational issues along with its defence co-operation with Russia is actually a wise strategy since it allows India to maintain friendly relations to all without antagonising anyone. It is better to maintain strong ties and lines of communication rather then pissing them off like China is doing to everyone except Russia now. The question what use are friends who will not aid you in times of conflict is pertinent. But it might not come to war, it is true that India's trade relations with these nations are no where near the one they have with China, but it is seen as an exploitative relation- China takes over US manufacturing jobs, there are voices in Russia raising concern over whether it will just be a sparsely populated resource backyard for China which China could easily run over with its large army and population. India must publicise the model of development and co-operation it stands for and contrast it with how others provide aid and support, in return for an exploitative resource extraction hardly benefiting the host country and its people apart from money, without directly pointing fingers. Mitigating climate change is one area where India must take the leadership for its own domestic benefit as well as to built very strong ties with the third world, island states and countries with a coast, but India has only hidden behind the excuse of low per-capita emission rather than take charge and forge ahead by adopting clean technology and working with other nations that too are threatened by climate change.

There is little scope for co-operation with China since our paths conflict almost always and rather than the co-operation due to the common concerns that Jawaharlal Nehru wanted, it is a scramble for resources and development and this is a fact rarely accepted or talked about. One can talk about soft power and diplomatic skills, but without real power to back it up, soft power is useless. It will be a tough balancing act and the priority is in preventing conflict, but our army has to be ready, our diplomats and politician's have to realise these and be ready to protect India's relations with all major nations without making enemies. Our news media must realise that amateurish and jingoistic reporting and ratcheting up the tension will not take us anywhere and calls for war will cost us more than China because, let us accept it, they are militarily and economically far ahead of us and we might have to wage a two-front war.

To sum up, let the people to people contact, trade, cricket and Track 2 diplomacy go on with Pakistan regardless of the dialogue process and except under extreme circumstances since these are ends in themselves. Also allow the dialogue process to move ahead and not backward and not be held hostage to incidents beyond civilian administration's control. As for China, strengthening our border defences and army, better ties with South-East Asian nations and neighbours and maintaining good relations with the major powers will only benefit India and tilt the world to view India favourably and China as more of a reckless rich resource hunter- all of which will add to India's benefit and attempts must be to prevent conflict by building strong relationships rather than using this to raise a conflict.

Growth as a Goal

"Growth is a necessary condition and we must unhesitatingly embrace growth as the highest mantra"said Finance Minister P. Chidambaram during his budget and he also said inclusive and sustainable development as ultimate mate goal.. Although it is not the right thing to begin with a quote, I must do so here because the quote signifies and hides many things at the same. I am okay with growth as long as this is not only economic growth that signifies an increase in GDP and a bull run at the stock exchange. I am all for growth if the increase in government revenues leads to higher spending in the social sector- health, education and social safety for the poor- and better outcomes. I am all for growth if it means better public transport, law and order, electricity and safe boundaries.

India has had a decent spell of growth in the last twenty years and even the "disappointing" 5% growth in 2012-2013 is not something to be scoffed at- any of the non-German europeans would be gladly willing take that growth rate and the US too. But then why is it that India has more poverty than sub-saharan africa, more children malnourished than the poorest of the poorest and a 136th rank in th Human Development Index?

The growth that India has witnessed has been the growth of the middle class and also the growth of a few individuals with good contacts with the government. The wealth of the richest Indians have grown mostly in the real estate, energy or natural resources sector and not in creation of advanced technology products or manufacturing. This was mainly gained as a result of exploitation of natural resources that belonged to the nation given away for dirt cheap prices. There are attempts to gain more of these at the cost of displacement of millions in Central India which has given rise to the red-corridor- more than anything, the red-corridor is a result of land grabbing under state sanction under the guise of development and when this is resisted, the state uses "eminent-domain" or weapons to silence the voices who try to fight back with a rag-tag army and an ideology.

The only real growth has been restricted to IT, Banking, some Public Sector Undertakings and even retail(but this merely fed on the other growth sectors) which do create products and deliver services without the need for government sops. The growth in the stock market creates no real assets as it is just the money that money makes making more money. A hoax message on twitter about a White House attacks show how volatile and unreasonable it is (a).

It is true that the government revenue has increased as a result of the growth, but not due to high taxes paid by the rich since there are only 42,800 crorepatis in the country according to the government. The increase in corporate taxes is only matched by the revenue foregone by the government (b) and so the real increase in revenue comes in large part from income taxes and indirect taxes. This from the middle-classes benefitted by the growth in a few sectors. But does the increase in revenue translate into better outcome in the social sector? Not really since we still have more poverty than sub-saharan africa, 44% of our children are undernourished and the government is nowhere near providing any sort of adequate healthcare for its people. The much lauded Right to Education has not been implemented and in places where implemented, the learning outcomes have been poor. Merely having more revenues do not translate into better social sector outcomes because sufficient money must be allocated and it must be spend accordingly.

There was a clamour that growth is necessary for national security. Well, I guess when we forget to build submarines to launch underwater missiles (c) or face inexcusable delays in delivery of defence equipment (d) it really is growth and better defence capabilities.

I do not see a growth here. I see growth in farmer suicides and in unsustainable exploitation of our environment as projects clear forests, pollute water bodies, damage eco-systems and more of the very same are offered in the name of growth. The growth that we have is coming at the cost of our environment and is not reaching the majority of our population. When Amartya Sen and Jean Dreze spoke about growth-mediated development, they meant development for everyone and not merely insane riches for a few that can remove roadblocks to access precious national resources and developing a small middle class large enough to buffer the government against nation-wide outrage.

The government does say a lot about inclusive growth, increase in social sector spending and allocation for health, education and sanitation- it has been nothing more than words. Once these words are put into action and their outcomes show they have achieved the necessary goals, then we can say that it is inclusive growth and growth is the ultimate goal. When the green cover is maintained and environment is protected, when growth is in the wealth, health and safety of all individuals, when there is access to education and jobs for all, when no one is deprived of their traditional lands, beliefs, social ties and culture to make way for a short cut to growth- then we can say India has grown.

Misconceptions on Studying

Before I begin, I need to establish my credentials. I prepared for IIT-JEE entrance, in addition took Biology in my senior secondary school, did an MSc in Chemistry and B.E in Electronics and Instrumentation from BITS-Goa and now I am preparing for civil service exams. The sheer number of books that have passed through my hands- I cannot claim to have studied them all, especially biology and electronics, but the rest were covered to the best of my abilities- is incalculable when you add novels and other books and on top of that, thousands of wikipedia pages too have assaulted by rods and cones and grey cells.

Now then, I would like to mention some popular misconceptions about studying and the truth behind them. These are not mentioned directly, but this is the mindset when those who have crossed their academic or learning from books phase in life. It is unfortunate though, they themselves must have gone through the same experience and yet forget it. I hope, rather I am sure that I will not forget this experience and once I am through with this phase, I will view everyone still going on with sympathy and will wish them the very best. But I am still here and I wish myself and the rest the very best as I begin-

1) Studying is easy. All it involves is sitting infront of a book (nowadays, a computer screen too) and reading page after page. It takes very little effort and in fact, it could be compared to the process of diffusion where the lesser knowledge we have faster the flow of knowledge due to the concentration gradient and learning becomes really easy
How many times have you simply stared and stared at the book and still nothing has made any sense?

2) One cannot get tired by studying since it is not real work. The body does not move (those who walk and study could get a concession here) and perhaps the hand moves while writing and the eyes too. But that cannot make one tired
Shouldn't we ask those staying in hostels about this? Especially the night before exams, about hunger pangs and desperate searches for foooood! Biscuits and maggi have kept me going on quite a few occasions.

3) Learning history is easy, it is like reading a story book and it is a fun process too
This depends on the quality of the book. Frankly, except for very few quality books, I find reading history boring and full of just facts, numbers, dates and effects without causes.

4) Practical is better than theory or one ounce of practice is equal to thousand ounces of theory
 I would like to know how many were actually benefited by the outdated and irrelevant experiments and mostly damaged  equipments in laboratories. I must confess the only exception was Digital Electronics lab- Instrumentation, Chemistry and Measurement Technique labs were quite useless and did nothing to my knowledge. School lab work isn't worth mentioning

I must admit that the last two can be made true and there are places trying to implement those. If there is a good education system that focuses on learning by doing or through experimentation and there are teachers who can teach students to learn and find out on their own and appreciate their efforts, this will happen. I hope this happens too, rather than the present rot learning system with emphasis only on exam results. The process is not what matters but merely the result and I dislike that concept. One should like the process or else becomes a burden. I would like to cherish the process of learning and I hope the results will take care of themselves. But it is easier said than done and this is another popular misconception- that one can be totally detached about one's actions and do them without worrying about the result.

Delving into History

I did not start this to practice essays or answers for exams, it was merely an attempt to put out to the world some parts of the regular rants that I come up with. Less than 5 percent of what I write are posted here and the remaining 95% are in the form of deleted or lost notepad files or just random scribblings in the back of my notebooks or any blank page I can access that time and some even on my mobile phone in the form of SMS drafts and notes.

I do not dare to read what I have written before, but I am sure and I have also been told that it is of quite poor standards. I am sure they did not want to hurt my feelings, I know the standards were just pathetic. But then, there was another purpose behind my doings- that of continuous self-improvement. I have tried different genres and different styles- sports, politics, movies, my personal life and presented them through the angle of current issues, history, my experiences and observations.


It has definitely been an experiment and it has been fun to look back and watch as the topics I have mentioned have become more prominent over the years. The most recent one being the case of rural health degree about which I posted a few days before Economic and Political Weekly came up with http://www.epw.in/editorials/doctors-rural-areas.html-0 .I had also posted on FDI in retail, Nuclear Energy and many of the articles I read later have covered the same points I mentioned and in some cases, what I posted were enough to disprove or counter the published articles (http://www.epw.in/commentary/nuclear-power-what-cost.html and http://craziestme.blogspot.in/2012/04/powerful-matters.html ). But there have been quiet a few silly ones in the beginning, posts with little credibility and substance and a poor style. This was part of the process of learning by doing and I think the current standards justify the earlier mistakes since they were all part of the process of self-improvement.

I would also like to add that some of the views expressed were stupid, unreasonable and unfeasible. But I still hold many of the opinions I have expressed and my views have not changed on these issues with the passage of time or in the light of new information since they have not been disproved or rendered obsolete or irrelevant.

There were periods of long absence, periods of high activity- they reflect my life during those days. For now, it is getting back to work, reading up new books with interesting insights and I realised that it can be interesting to learn history- not the facts and dates and names but why and how. I realised why Gandhiji took up the cause of the suppressed classes, the ideas behind the origins of the Muslim League and how some of our reformers came to support the causes they are known for. For the first time in my life, I like history and frankly, it is surprising how many of the issues like caste discrimination, unequal status of women, focus on higher education to the neglect of primary education and communalism have still not been fully addressed in spite of over a century of effort.

Gandhiji wrote that "But to remove legal inequalities will be a mere palliative" on the position of women in India (Young India, 17 October 1929, as reproduced in Makers of Modern India by Ramachandra Guha) and the state still resorts to more and stricter laws to address the issue of women rather than strengthen implementation of existing laws. We, who call Gandhiji the father of our nation have also failed to take his message to heart and change our society and family by respecting women. History holds lessons for us, not just data, and those lessons are what we should be taught rather than the mundane dates and events. We should also refrain from saying that since they are part of records, why should we know them when we can just check them up (a usual refrain in the time of internet). We can check up dates, events and pure data but the lessons can be learned only if we read history carefully and analyse it.

Poking my nose into unnecessary foreign affairs

North Korea is upping the ante as it threatens USA with nuclear attacks. I do not think any sensible nation will actually want to attack the US since it is the ticket ensured annihilation and this is true in spite of the economic frailties in US right now. But there could be a smart strategy behind it- the threat to Japan and South Korea might be real, but all North Korea does is to remind of a really hungry or frustrated child seeking attention from the family elders or the class-teacher (another comparison is a drunk, heart-broken lover who is threatening suicide/murder if the girl doesn't reciprocate his love). They are in desperate need of food and medical supplies and the only way the world will take not of it is by brandishing its only weapon. By negotiating from a position of (imaginary) strength, the new military ruler and the government can save its face infront of the world and its people who have only their nuclear strength as a matter of pride when compared to an economically prosperous southern neighbour.

Consider the alternate or rather, consider what is happening with Iran- sanctions upon sanctions, denial of opportunities to trade with other nations and naval exercises in its backyard. Iran has always said it's intentions are peaceful and nuclear research is for medical and electricity needs only. Maybe Iran needs to come out and say we are pursuing nuclear weapons, we will stop if you (whoever is trying to impose sanctions) accept some of our un-reasonable demands and then enter into negotiations to get reasonable concessions.

I have read quite a few articles which said Pakistan missed an opportunity when the public sentiment against Taliban hit a peak after the Malala Yusufzai incident, that they failed to organise a military operation and try to end the threat from Taliban. It was atleast an opportunity to drop the myth or the organised misconception that there is a good Taliban and a bad Taliban. It was an incident that shocked us, the imagery too obvious and heart rending for someone even far far away from such incidents- an innocent girl, fighting for her and her country's women by going to school. A bunch of violent men shoots her at the school- a threat to every other woman trying to be independent in that nation.

I am not going to explain how quickly the incident was turned as a conspiracy by the US to push Pakistan into a military strike against the Taliban. It was dumped as a conspiracy theory and so girls will continue to live under threat from Taliban, a nation is still the hostage of a radical, sacrilegious and violent gang of thugs and these thugs are used by its neighbour as bargaining chips and for influence in the region. The same thing happened in the US too, but there, it has been happening for decades- the battle against gun control.

The US shooting incidents- It is obvious guns killed the students in the school, devotees at the gurudwara and movie-goers at Colorado. But the argument that it is not guns, but people that kill people have been widely used. They also say there are thousands of road accidents and yet we allow people to drive. Apart from the fact that we cannot outlaw people and prevent them from getting angry, the common sense logic that it would be prudent to keep them away from guns when they are angry is not accepted. And unlike cars, guns are MEANT to kill and they kill on purpose, not by accident. So, it is easier (they are cheaper than a car too btw) in the US to buy a device that kills people than to drive a car- it requires a license and a car.

Another argument is that guns are necessary to protect oneself against attacks and others holding guns. The point that is skipped here is that more and more individuals are forced to hold guns for safety since a few people hold them. So confiscate these guns too, but no, let us put more guns into the hands of people rather than removing these dangerous weapons. I also have a doubt, I think only Permanent Residents are allowed to carry guns. Perhaps expats, migrants and foreign students in the US do not need protection. But inspite of these incidents and the obviousness of the need to control gun proliferation (rather, to prevent flooding of streets with guns), I hear that a petition has been filed to the White House website to deport Piers Morgan who expressed views in contravention to the US second amendment. Perhaps they skipped the US first amendment? (For more on this, read a ) I would like to know how US citizens who believe in gun control will be treated.

On biases, prejudice and commitment

Civil Service in India looks for glorified amateurs, jack of all trades but masters of none, generalists and paper pushers and the list of the usual diatribes go on. Without any skills in a specific field, they decide on matters related to banking, defence, culture, environment and energy is the usual argument of specialists who want to make decisions in these fields but are allegedly kept away by the apples of the government's eye.

I have seen specialists (doctors, lawyers, accountants and auditors) vehemently defend their position based on narrow interpretation and interests generated by their profession. It is not a fault or deficiency, but an essential pre-requisite in their professions.

Citing anecdotes is not a scientific way, but I do give them to explain what I am talking about. A doctor friend of mine, who otherwise is quite liberal and forward-thinking, is sensible and took up the profession as a service argued that introducing a course like Bachelor of Rural Medicine would dilute quality, drive real doctors out of their jobs and lead to poor health outcomes for rural population. It is unfortunate that someone I respect a lot and hold in high regards had to fall prey to a narrow view based on her profession. She expressed her views during the strike organised by medical students across Kerala in 2010 against the idea of a BRM course.

Doctors do not want to be posted in deep, unreachable villages where pay is low and living facilities are not adequate. Distance is also a factor when it comes to doctors with families and many have a post-graduate degree. It is primary and secondary care that villagers need urgently, basic health interventions and first-aid- not super speciality care and so appointing post-graduate doctors is not the need of the population and the doctors would also find their skills unused making them look for better opportunities. The only reason many take up such posts is because it is a government job and the inherent job safety. 

 

But the majority of doctors do not turn up at their health centres and have a flourishing private practice. This is true not just of doctors in rural areas but those from medical colleges and hospitals in city too follow this method. In the interior heartlands of the red-belt or Left Wing Extremism affected districts the situation is dire. Absence rate of doctors is more than 50% (validated by several surveys), doctor-patient ratio is 1:25,870 on average in India and they are concentrated in the urban areas. To enforce attendance, a monitoring mechanism by empowering local bodies, who would also pay the salaries for doctors, is being considered. I hope this works, but I am not so sure because I do not think local bodies can pay the doctors enough to attract them to stay in a place with very little amenities and also face the threat of violence.

 

In spite of lack of doctors, high absence rate among existing doctors that amounts to dereliction of duty and low interest in a rural posting, the current medical fraternity are blocking an urgently needed reform in healthcare by providing for a course that directly addresses the healthcare needs of rural population. Their only solution is for the state to appoint more doctors- the fact that doctors are not interested in these postings and are not attending to their duties are not heeded to.

An auditor who alleged corruption and scope of environmental damage in a government scheme that replaced incandescent bulbs with CFL lamps due to their high mercury contend also argues that crores have been invested in a mega hydro-electric power project and it has been delayed due to denial of environment clearance. The concern is not about environment, but merely about audit as an end to itself.

When it comes to holistic decision making- a case where the social, environmental and economic impact is to be considered (I do not include political factors since that is the job of the political executive) someone who is not restricted by a narrow view must make that decision and that can be done by generalists who do not owe allegiance to any specific field.

PS- When I mean decision making, I mean advising the political executive on the course of action on a particular issue since the final decisions and policies are made by them.